Abstract
The publisher of the Max Weber Gesamtausgabe, J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), has now published four of the projected seven volumes of Max Weber’s lectures. Each of these should interest anyone concerned with Weber’s thinking, but this one, Arbeiterfrage und Arbeiterbewegung (Worker Question and Worker Movement) should be especially interesting because it reveals a side of Weber that few scholars suspect existed. The lectures included in this book show that Weber was an expert on socialist theory and was a real champion of the factory worker.
Weber gave the lecture courses “The Worker Question and Worker Movement” and “The German Worker Question in City and Country” at Freiburg in 1895; he gave the former again three years later at Heidelberg. As both titles indicate, the primary focus was on the worker. Weber begins with definitions, then offers an overview of the worker in history, and ends with some concluding remarks. Weber insists that the worker does not work because he wants to, but because he must satisfy his needs. With the exception of the “Handwerkmeister,” workers work for others. In antiquity most workers were “unfree,” that is, they were slaves who worked for their owners. There was a chronic need for more slaves; thus Rome needed a standing army to conquer new lands and secure new slaves. The slave was undependable and inefficient and therefore could only be counted on to work under compulsion. In the 1896 speech entitled “The Social Causes of the Decline of Ancient Culture,” Weber argued that the Roman Empire collapsed because of economic causes, which were directly traceable to the overwhelming dependence on slaves. In these lecture courses Weber insisted that modern culture was able to develop because of the return of the free laborer in the Middle Ages. The medieval worker tended to work for a master, but he was still free. In contrast, the modern worker is “formally free” but “personally dependent.” Weber means that the modern worker is ultimately dependent on the modern factory owner for work. There are three important features of the modern workplace: the separation between home and workplace, the demarcation between factory worker and factory owner, and, most importantly, the use of complex machines in the factory.
Weber allocates some time discussing the history of socialism. He speaks knowledgeably about the French and the English socialist movements, but his real interest is in the German movements. He praises Ferdinand Lassalle for his brilliant writing and his simplified thinking and he approves of Lassalle’s grasp of legal matters and his lack of economic determinism. Weber notes Lassalle’s regard for Bismarck and their shared nationalism, but he disapproves of Lassalle’s desire for complete power over the masses and faults him for having massive personal ambitions. Weber also faults Karl Marx for his unbridled ambition. Weber objects to Marx’s disdain for his colleagues and his despising the masses. However, Weber recognized that Marx possessed extraordinary acumen and he regarded the Communist Manifesto as a great scientific work. But, Weber believed that it contained illusory ideas, as shown by subsequent history. Marx had been convinced that the inevitable revolution would lead to political dominance, but as Weber showed, Marx’s economic preconditions were lacking.
Weber had perhaps the greatest regard for Friedrich Engels and held that his The Situation of the Working Class in England was of the highest scientific value. It was Engels who provided the most comprehensive list of negative effects that the factory has on workers. These include physical dangers, the reduction of wages, and even the destruction of the family. Weber notes that machines reduce the need for strong men; the factory owner can employ women and children. But, Weber notes that machines are the “Achilles’ heel” of the owner. In order to survive, the factory must employ trained workers to run the machines continuously and effectively. Studies by others, including Lujo Brentano, proved that an owner who wanted better production needed to reduce working hours and provide better working conditions. If the owner did not do this, the workers could band together to fight for better pay and better conditions.
Weber’s major criticism of socialists was that they tended to be utopian dreamers who had no real understanding either of human nature or the nature of economics. At heart, they were passive; while they talked about agitation and disruptions they really believed in economic determinism. They spoke of class conflicts and offered theories that focused only on economic factors. They were idealists who believed that economic and political struggles would inevitably give way to a future in which there is no private property and full equality. In contrast, Weber recognized that the domination of “man over man” was inevitable and acknowledged that concerns other than material ones prompt people to act. Weber claimed that “science” could only help clarify possible consequences of actions; he advised his students to read his Freiberg Inaugural Dissertation to gain an understanding of self-determination. What the workers needed was not idealist theories, but realistic strategies to gain political and economic power. This they accomplish by engaging in collective actions like strikes and boycotts.
This volume of lectures prompts us to rethink fundamentally our views of Weber. His thorough discussion of Marx helps refute the prevailing notion that he was acquainted only with the tenets of a number of Marxism’s less notable adherents. Weber’s penetrating criticism of socialism minimizes the contention that he had little interest in understanding it as a theory. Most importantly, perhaps, these lectures force us to rethink our belief that Weber had little or no interest in the modern factory workers’ lives. They demonstrate that not only did he have a good grasp of the plight of the workers but that he offered constructive comments on how they could improve their chances in economic struggles. This fascinating book shows that in the early stages of his career, Max Weber was not just a scholar interested in the history and effects of capitalism, but that he was a partisan on the side of the workers.